| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:30:52 +0200
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 12/50] KVM: s390: wire up bpb feature
On 04/30/2018 08:17 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 09:51:27AM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 17:53:46 +0200
>> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/27/2018 05:46 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:17:15PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 05:10:04PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 04/27/2018 03:58 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>> 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ick, that is wrong right there, my scripts messed up, this should not
>>>>> have 2 author lines :(
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll go look at all of these, odds are it made the same error
>>>>> everywhere...
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I've now fixed that up in the queue.
>>>
>>> As this patch backport was also functionally incorrect and Martin is already away
>>> do you want me to send an updated version?
>>
>> Checked my 4.4 backport git branch and indeed the hunk is misplaced.
>> Sometime I wonder about the patch tool and the hickups it can produce.
>>
>> My take on the replacement patch looks as follows:
>>
>> ---
>> >From 82f20b6237a8d04378c8f4a1614bf32a6c8d8a8b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>> Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 14:44:34 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH 03/18] KVM: s390: wire up bpb feature
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 35b3fde6203b932b2b1a5b53b3d8808abc9c4f60 ]
>>
>> The new firmware interfaces for branch prediction behaviour changes
>> are transparently available for the guest. Nevertheless, there is
>> new state attached that should be migrated and properly resetted.
>> Provide a mechanism for handling reset, migration and VSIE.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
>> [Changed capability number to 152. - Radim]
>> Signed-off-by: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 ++-
>> arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h | 3 +++
>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 1 +
>> 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index e9a983f40a24..7d9c5917da2b 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -136,7 +136,8 @@ struct kvm_s390_sie_block {
>> __u16 ipa; /* 0x0056 */
>> __u32 ipb; /* 0x0058 */
>> __u32 scaoh; /* 0x005c */
>> - __u8 reserved60; /* 0x0060 */
>> +#define FPF_BPBC 0x20
>> + __u8 fpf; /* 0x0060 */
>> __u8 ecb; /* 0x0061 */
>> __u8 ecb2; /* 0x0062 */
>> #define ECB3_AES 0x04
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> index ef1a5fcc6c66..3aec52253c04 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> +++ b/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
>> @@ -151,6 +151,7 @@ struct kvm_guest_debug_arch {
>> #define KVM_SYNC_ARCH0 (1UL << 4)
>> #define KVM_SYNC_PFAULT (1UL << 5)
>> #define KVM_SYNC_VRS (1UL << 6)
>> +#define KVM_SYNC_BPBC (1UL << 10)
>> /* definition of registers in kvm_run */
>> struct kvm_sync_regs {
>> __u64 prefix; /* prefix register */
>> @@ -168,6 +169,8 @@ struct kvm_sync_regs {
>> __u64 vrs[32][2]; /* vector registers */
>> __u8 reserved[512]; /* for future vector expansion */
>> __u32 fpc; /* only valid with vector registers */
>> + __u8 bpbc : 1; /* bp mode */
>> + __u8 reserved2 : 7;
>> };
>>
>> #define KVM_REG_S390_TODPR (KVM_REG_S390 | KVM_REG_SIZE_U32 | 0x1)
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> index 23e3f5d77a24..ca03c847127a 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>> @@ -257,6 +257,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
>> case KVM_CAP_S390_VECTOR_REGISTERS:
>> r = MACHINE_HAS_VX;
>> break;
>> + case KVM_CAP_S390_BPB:
>> + r = test_facility(82);
>> + break;
>> default:
>> r = 0;
>> }
>> @@ -1262,6 +1265,8 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> KVM_SYNC_CRS |
>> KVM_SYNC_ARCH0 |
>> KVM_SYNC_PFAULT;
>> + if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 82))
>> + vcpu->run->kvm_valid_regs |= KVM_SYNC_BPBC;
>> if (test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 129))
>> vcpu->run->kvm_valid_regs |= KVM_SYNC_VRS;
>>
>> @@ -1327,6 +1332,7 @@ static void kvm_s390_vcpu_initial_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> current->thread.fpu.fpc = 0;
>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->gbea = 1;
>> vcpu->arch.sie_block->pp = 0;
>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->fpf &= ~FPF_BPBC;
>> vcpu->arch.pfault_token = KVM_S390_PFAULT_TOKEN_INVALID;
>> kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
>> if (!kvm_s390_user_cpu_state_ctrl(vcpu->kvm))
>> @@ -2145,6 +2151,11 @@ static void sync_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>> if (vcpu->arch.pfault_token == KVM_S390_PFAULT_TOKEN_INVALID)
>> kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
>> }
>> + if ((kvm_run->kvm_dirty_regs & KVM_SYNC_BPBC) &&
>> + test_kvm_facility(vcpu->kvm, 82)) {
>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->fpf &= ~FPF_BPBC;
>> + vcpu->arch.sie_block->fpf |= kvm_run->s.regs.bpbc ? FPF_BPBC : 0;
>> + }
>> kvm_run->kvm_dirty_regs = 0;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -2162,6 +2173,7 @@ static void store_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>> kvm_run->s.regs.pft = vcpu->arch.pfault_token;
>> kvm_run->s.regs.pfs = vcpu->arch.pfault_select;
>> kvm_run->s.regs.pfc = vcpu->arch.pfault_compare;
>> + kvm_run->s.regs.bpbc = (vcpu->arch.sie_block->fpf & FPF_BPBC) == FPF_BPBC;
>> }
>>
>> int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> index 03f3618612aa..376d0ab5b9f2 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
>> @@ -831,6 +831,7 @@ struct kvm_ppc_smmu_info {
>> #define KVM_CAP_GUEST_DEBUG_HW_WPS 120
>> #define KVM_CAP_SPLIT_IRQCHIP 121
>> #define KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD_ANY_LENGTH 122
>> +#define KVM_CAP_S390_BPB 152
>>
>> #ifdef KVM_CAP_IRQ_ROUTING
>>
>
> Did I include the correct version in the latest release, or do I need to
> do a revert and add this one in?
Martins backport and my backport looks almost identical, so you can keep mine.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists